took the W off of wholistic?
Must have seem him coming. Can we have it back? W?
Odd works in strange and myterious ways, or I made a mistake. Or someone has a sense of humor. Note the odd G oh d another {o}ops! Ok, its me. I was avoiding the G word. By George or Rather letter. See Dan or CBS.
But back to the way this worked, I thought it would be funny to post this on wholism or was it wholistic, since my first search came out with 36,300,000 and I wanted to tweak that by one, but when I refreshed the search engine instead of 36 million 300 thousand and one, it dropped to 57,000 for wholistic and if that is not better, there are still 21,100 for wholism.
But I digress, or progress, it remains why wholism is a variant on holism. It turns out that it may be a long battle at least at this point over Words. Suffice to say for now that for our health we bridge the gap between the whole and the hole.
[Non sequitur - or might it? *]
* akin to footnotes?
[The best I can wiki-google is that 1929 was when holism was spelled first, while some may believe in the power of spells, it seems that words have always been a field that yields.]
[not such]
[Happy End of Year and Hope for a New Air-or]
FORMER HOME OF BEATINGAROUNDTHEBUSH.ORG >> HOME OF Political_Progress_For_People.blogspot.com >> >> >> Political Prodding and Probing People for Progress << << << >>> [[ For those NOT...BeatingAroundTheBush See links.]] <<< [[ EMAIL: LeRoy-Rogers at comcast net ]]
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query wholistic. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query wholistic. Sort by date Show all posts
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Economics 2011
Ravi Batra's Weapons of Mass Exploitation.(Economics For Beginners)
Is the United States broke?
Who broke it?
Economics in One Lesson.*
(Austrian) Economics in One Lesson**
* actually a review of Economics in One Lesson, which includes a caution for those without "a significant amount of economics", they may risk "permanent neurological and ideological damage".***
** Austro-Libertarian Economics (Mises Project Video)
*** seriously [Stick to bold links to be safe: I don't know if it is just me, or my Economics 250 A&B, or my Marx, Nietzsche, Freud 374, but I am not sure I will risk a full read or view of Economics in One Lesson. But I will say, as Nietzche put it there is German thinking and there is Oriental thinking; linear and wholistic (not to put things in black and white). Then (I might say)there is Austrian thinking; not to cast aspersions of intent or geographical origins, but I will follow up with related Economics (and other)links that I feel are helpful.]
Is the United States broke?
Who broke it?
Economics in One Lesson.*
(Austrian) Economics in One Lesson**
* actually a review of Economics in One Lesson, which includes a caution for those without "a significant amount of economics", they may risk "permanent neurological and ideological damage".***
** Austro-Libertarian Economics (Mises Project Video)
*** seriously [Stick to bold links to be safe: I don't know if it is just me, or my Economics 250 A&B, or my Marx, Nietzsche, Freud 374, but I am not sure I will risk a full read or view of Economics in One Lesson. But I will say, as Nietzche put it there is German thinking and there is Oriental thinking; linear and wholistic (not to put things in black and white). Then (I might say)there is Austrian thinking; not to cast aspersions of intent or geographical origins, but I will follow up with related Economics (and other)links that I feel are helpful.]
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
The Bully...
Poor Pit. Not to pull my R's upon my return from Japan, it does seem odd though, for billionaires(and corporations) for free speech not wanting their names known for fear of bullying. The pity is in the pendulum of victim hoods. Not to mention[*] the other slap shot at robustness.
[*]10-14-10 My sarcasm might be too subtle here, in that the Poor link(above) on Taleb's Robustness may be a slightly slanted perspective of economics from the business perspective. The Business Insider might be no more than a blog or astro bagger in terms of its criticism or incomprehesion of Taleb's theories. Taleb online The New Yorker under my usual meanderings. I would also suggest whether Bernanke has read Taleb or not, he should explain that there has not been a replacement for Keynesian economics, and that the government has a role to play or the balance will continue to teeter for the moneyed rather than the purposeful. On the other hand this may just be an incompresible way of saying that unless Taleb is understood and improved upon, we can suffice with continued tinkering as long as it is with purpose and for the people. Unfortunately this may be a bigger task than understanding Taleb. What I allude or have links here to, are the international and comprehensive nature of economics evolution. And simply put, the economy must not fall off the wall, but work on the wall must be comprehensive if not wholistic. If I may reiterate my tetrahedron of physics, psychology, philosophy and politics ofor purpose. The pinnacle of the project is the purpose of the structure and the process that works whatever is intended** to work.
** And I have not intentionally left "we" out of this, but it puts politics, religion and economics as part of the process not the purpose, or the be all and end all, intended or not.
[At the risk of further incomprehensiveness, I suggest that the administration is doing what it can short of a complete replacement of Keynesian economics, otherwise know as my Egg/Wall metaphor, while Taleb's approach may be just the thing as a goal. There are natural laws, and they must be worked with or they will be against us all. See tetrahedron not theology.]
[*]10-14-10 My sarcasm might be too subtle here, in that the Poor link(above) on Taleb's Robustness may be a slightly slanted perspective of economics from the business perspective. The Business Insider might be no more than a blog or astro bagger in terms of its criticism or incomprehesion of Taleb's theories. Taleb online The New Yorker under my usual meanderings. I would also suggest whether Bernanke has read Taleb or not, he should explain that there has not been a replacement for Keynesian economics, and that the government has a role to play or the balance will continue to teeter for the moneyed rather than the purposeful. On the other hand this may just be an incompresible way of saying that unless Taleb is understood and improved upon, we can suffice with continued tinkering as long as it is with purpose and for the people. Unfortunately this may be a bigger task than understanding Taleb. What I allude or have links here to, are the international and comprehensive nature of economics evolution. And simply put, the economy must not fall off the wall, but work on the wall must be comprehensive if not wholistic. If I may reiterate my tetrahedron of physics, psychology, philosophy and politics ofor purpose. The pinnacle of the project is the purpose of the structure and the process that works whatever is intended** to work.
** And I have not intentionally left "we" out of this, but it puts politics, religion and economics as part of the process not the purpose, or the be all and end all, intended or not.
[At the risk of further incomprehensiveness, I suggest that the administration is doing what it can short of a complete replacement of Keynesian economics, otherwise know as my Egg/Wall metaphor, while Taleb's approach may be just the thing as a goal. There are natural laws, and they must be worked with or they will be against us all. See tetrahedron not theology.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)